Re: [PATCH v2 01/10] fs: massage locking helpers

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



> Here if locked == true but say !(sb->s_flags & SB_ACTIVE), we fail to
> unlock the superblock now AFAICT.

Yeah, I've already fixed that up in-tree. I realized this because I've
fixed it correctly in the last patch.

> And here if you really mean it with some kind of clean bail out, we should
> somehow get rid of the s_active reference we have. But exactly because of
> that getting super_lock_excl() failure here would be really weird...
> 
> Otherwise the patch looks good.

With the above fix folded in can I take your Ack?




[Index of Archives]     [Linux Ext4 Filesystem]     [Union Filesystem]     [Filesystem Testing]     [Ceph Users]     [Ecryptfs]     [NTFS 3]     [AutoFS]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Share Photos]     [Security]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux Cachefs]     [Reiser Filesystem]     [Linux RAID]     [NTFS 3]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]     [CEPH Development]

  Powered by Linux